This Saturday, June 30, 2012, the UN is
hosting an international
conference in Geneva in another attempt to find a
peaceful solution to
what is already defined by all as a fully fledged war
in Syria. The
ongoing military tie between the sides may continue for years;
thus, the
UN Security Council is trying to be creative in finding a solution
that
will grant Bashar al-Assad's regime a safe exit. Until now, there is an
agreement between the council members on the creation of a transition
government in Syria, but that's not enough. Bashar al-Assad will not
sacrifice himself for the sake of the American military interests. The
recent downing of a Turkish F-4 by the Syrian army shows the latter is
in good shape and ready for a long conflict. Under these circumstances,
the Alawi Republic of Latakia may be revived to rescue Assad.

The
complex situation in Syria includes two main struggles. The most
obvious one
is between the Syrian Army and the West-backed Free Syrian
Army. In
parallel, there is a violent conflict between the Alawi
minority-closely
related to Shia Islam-and Sunni Arabs. The Alawi
comprise roughly 12% of the
population and hold the power; the Assad
dynasty is Alawi. The Sunni are 74%
of the population and are attempting
to use the ongoing mayhem in order to
gain power. The ethnic conflict is
conducted by paramilitary organizations
trying to evict each other from
their respective territories. The most
visible result of this conflict
is the gathering of Syrian refugees in
Turkey, and the incessant reports
on massacres of civilians. The Syrian
Army-where Alawis enjoy a
privileged position-favors the Alawi population,
thus the ethnic
struggle is a tie despite the unequal forces
involved.

Also the military conflict is in a draw. The Syrian Army gets
support
from Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, while the rebels are
financially supported by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, and get
military help from Western sources smuggling weapons via Turkey.
Reliable sources claim that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are paying the
salaries of the rebel army. The Syrian regime is presenting this
conflict to the Syrian people as a war between Shia and Sunni Arabs.
Yet, there is more than a religious and ethnic conflict in this war.
Tarsus is one of Syria's two main ports; it is also the only Russian
navy base in the Mediterranean Sea. Russia is unlikely to give up this
strategic asset for the sake of the creation of a Western puppet-regime.
To complete this complex picture, Turkey is helping the Syrian
Kurds-which seek the creation of a Kurdish state-in an attempt to
sabotage the creation of Kurdistan in regions now belonging to Turkey,
Syria and Iraq.

Under these conditions, the fighting could persist
for years. The
downing of the Turkish F-4 proved to NATO that Syria is not
Libya. Any
Western country attempting to violently oust the Syrian regime
will pay
dearly. During an elections year in the USA, there is no chance
that
will happen. Coffins of USA soldiers arriving on the eve of the
elections will spoil President Obama’s celebration. Thus, this Saturday,
the international conference will try to find a different
solution.

Bashar al-Assad may be forced out of power if he loses the
support of
the Alawi people. This may happen in three different ways. All
Syrian
pilots and most senior officers in the army are Alawi; if they turn
against him, he'll have no armed forces left. Then, the Alawi mid-class
running the Syrian administration may reject him and bring the country
to a standstill. Finally, the Alawi-majority coastal areas may decide to
support a different leader. These scenarios are unlikely to happen since
the Alawi reasonably fear a Sunni-ruled Syria. This is a clear tie.

A
creative solution to the conflict may look back at events that took
place in
the previous century. An Alawi State already existed between
1920 and 1946,
under the French Mandate of the League of Nations. The
city of Latakia was
its capital, and it occupied territories that
nowadays form the Syrian
Latakia and Tarsus governorates. The Alawis may
agree to the destitution of
Assad in exchange for the revival of their
republic. In this scenario, Syria
will be split in at least two parts.
The Alawis clearly gain despite their
losing control over most of the
country. The West will gain since a major
country opposing it will be
split. The Kurds will gain; a weaker Syria
increases their chance to
obtain an independent state. In the short term,
the Russians will get to
keep their military port. Iran will have a stronger
position in this
state than it has in current Syria, gaining influence along
the coastal
areas next to the vast gas fields of the Eastern Mediterranean.
In the
short term most players will gain, thus it is a feasible political
solution.

Syria has already been sliced in the past. In 1938,
Hatay—a small
territory on the Mediterranean coast—became independent from
the French
mandate of Syria as the Republic of Hatay. Following a referendum
in
1939, Hatay decided to join Turkey, forming the singular panhandle shape
that can be seen on the maps of Turkey. Syria still doesn’t recognize
that event as legitimate. An important aspect of that event is that the
Alawis are one of two main ethnic groups inhabiting Hatay. Essentially,
the breakup of Latakia may be seen by Turkey as a repetition of the
past. After a few years, a referendum may be held on the issue of the
gathering of the Alawis with their brothers in Turkey, under a single
political entity. Latakia will join Turkey, giving the latter better
access to the strategic gas-fields. This scenario is so tempting to most
players that stopping it may be impossible. One more country-which is
keeping silent until now-will profit.

If Syria is split, Zion and its
elders will applaud. Israel will cement
its illegal annexation of the Syrian
Golan Heights, and be closer than
ever to create a regional empire based on
destitution and violence. The
survival of a strong and democratic Syria is
essential for ensuring
regional peace and stability; no region accepting
Western occupation has
ever known peace. Syria is unlikely to be the
exception.

Currently in the news, there is much talk of how the UN-Arab League
sponsored peace plan is falling apart. Most recently, there is the
discussion of how Syrian troops fired rounds across the Turkish border.
Yet, the peace plan is not meant to stop the violence, rather it is
meant as a ploy to demonize the Assad government even further and to
push for intervention.

The text of the peace plan is made up of six
points that call on the
Syrian government to

(1) commit to work with
the Envoy in an inclusive Syrian-led political
process to address the
legitimate aspirations and concerns of the Syrian
people, and, to this end,
commit to appoint an empowered interlocutor
when invited to do so by the
Envoy.

(2) commit to stop the fighting and achieve urgently an effective
United
Nations-supervised cessation of armed violence in all its forms by
all
parties to protect civilians and stabilize the country.

(3)
ensure timely provision of humanitarian assistance to all areas
affected by
the fighting, and to this end, as immediate steps, to accept
and implement a
daily two-hour humanitarian pause and to coordinate
exact time and
modalities of the daily pause through an efficient
mechanism, including at
local level;

(4) intensify the pace and scale of release of arbitrarily
detained
persons, including especially vulnerable categories of persons, and
persons involved in peaceful political activities, provide without delay
through appropriate channels a list of all places in which such persons
are being detained, immediately begin organizing access to such
locations and through appropriate channels respond promptly to all
written requests for information, access or release regarding such
persons;

(5) ensure freedom of movement throughout the country for
journalists
and a non-discriminatory visa policy for them;

(6)
respect freedom of association and the right to demonstrate
peacefully as
legally guaranteed. [1]

The entire plan puts the emphasis for solving the
conflict on the Assad
government, ignoring the fact that there is an armed
opposition that
also needs to put down its weapons and come to the table.
The most the
plan mentions about the opposition is that “Similar commitments
would be
sought by the Envoy from the opposition and all relevant elements
to
stop the fighting.”

Nowhere does it explicitly state that the
opposition itself must stop
fighting. Despite this major flaw in the plan,
the Al Assad government
agreed to implement it; however, they wanted the
same commitments from
the opposition as well.

This is a major problem
for the West and its Middle Eastern puppets as
they are arming and financing
the Syrian opposition in a bid to
overthrow Al Assad. This can be seen by
the fact that there were
recently 13 French officers captured by the Syrian
military.[2] Thus,
the West doesn’t require the armed opposition to obey the
UN peace plan
as it would hinder their goal of overthrowing Al
Assad.

After the Al Assad government agreed to the peace plan, there were
still
clashes against opposition forces, thus leading the Syrian government
to
demand there be written guarantees from the opposition to stop fighting.
However, this was rejected by the Free Syrian Army, with their leader
saying that they “[do] not recognize the regime ‘and for that reason we
will not give guarantees.’” However, he still argued that “the
government should withdraw its forces to bases and remove checkpoints
from streets.”[3] This is quite hypocritical as a ceasefire is a two-way
street; if one side puts down their arms, than the other side must
reciprocate or there can be no ceasefire. Yet, this is where the shaping
of the peace plan comes in; the onus is put on the Al Assad government
to stop fighting, however, it doesn’t force the opposition to do the
same, rather it allows for the opposition to continue with its violent
acts. By doing this, it is forcing the Al Assad government to break the
peace plan, thus demonizing them and creating a situation that allows
for the West and its allies to continue their support for the Syrian
opposition.

Yet, in looking at the peace plan, one must also look at
who wrote it:
Kofi Annan. Annan, currently the UN-Arab League envoy to
Syria, is part
of the imperial apparatus as he was a part of the Ford
Foundation, which
has deep connections to the CIA.[4] In his September 20,
1999 speech as
the UN Secretary General, using Bosnia and Rwanda as
examples, argued
that in those cases “the States had failed in their duty to
protect
their own people. He therefore concluded that the sovereignty of
States,
guiding principle of the UN Charter, constitutes an obstacle to
human
rights protection.”[5] (emphasis added) Thus, he started the basis of
what would become known as ‘Responsibility to Protect,’ a doctrine which
has been used by the West to intervene in countries in order to
overthrow regimes that refuse to bow down to them.

More recently,
there has been talk of the incident where Syrian soldiers
fired at people
across the Syrian-Turkish border resulting in the death
of a cameraman and
five people being wounded. However, what is being
ignored is the fact that
the Syrian soldiers may have been firing at
rebels. NPR states that “The
Syrian soldiers were believed to be firing
at rebels who tried to escape to
the refugee camp after ambushing a
military checkpoint, according to the
Britain-based Syrian Observatory
for Human Rights, citing a network of
sources on the ground.”[6] One
must also realize the role Turkey has played
in the Syrian conflict.
They have sent officers into Syria. In February, it
was reported that
“more than 40 Turkish intelligence officers were captured
by the Syrian
army.”[7] In addition to this, they have in the past made
threats that
they were going to intervene in Syria.[8] Thus Turkey itself is
supporting the Syrian opposition and cannot be trusted.

The peace
plan is nothing but a joke meant to force the Al Assad
government to break
the plan, thus allowing for the West and its allies,
specifically Turkey, to
intervene in Syria and create a puppet regime.
This will only aid in the
efforts to hurt Iran as Syria is Iran’s main
regional ally and if Syria
collapses, Iran will truly be isolated. This
attempt at ‘peace,’ is truly an
attempt at war.

The United States is flying unmanned reconnaissance planes over Syria
to
monitor the regime's escalating crackdown on dissent, U.S. defense
officials told NBC television on Saturday.

The drones are being used
to gather evidence on the Syrian security
forces' violence against
pro-democracy protesters that can be used to
"make a case for a widespread
international response," the U.S.-based
broadcaster quoted the unnamed
officials as saying.

The Pentagon officials stressed that the U.S. is not
preparing the
ground for a military intervention, but is simply collecting
evidence of
President Bashar Assad's crackdown on protesters.

There
was no official comment from Syria on the report.

The West has ruled out
a Libya-style military intervention in Syria to
stop 11 months of
bloodshed.

Meanwhile, there have been disagreements regarding what action
must be
taken against Syria. Turkey refuses to set up buffer zones for
civilians
on its border with Syria, and demands that the transfer of
equipment and
medicine be done via the sea and not through its
territory.

France, on the other hand, maintains that such buffer zones
must be on
land and will anyhow spill over the Turkish border.

While
the Syrian army continued to attack Daraa and Homs with tanks and
heavy
artillery, large protests also took place in Damascus, as well as
Aleppo, a
city which hasn't taken part in anti-regime protests regularly
thus
far.

The resolution passed by the United Nations General Assembly
condemning
Syria, supported by 137 countries, has not impressed the Syrian
regime
which is only escalating its war against the opposition and widening
its
war zones. Russia continues to come to aid of the Assad regime with
weapon shipments, and on Friday two Iranian warships passed through the
Suez Canal on the way to Tartus port in Syria.

Western officials fear
that Iranian military presence along with Russian
aid could turn Syria into
a center of international friction much worse
than the struggle inside
Syria. They fear that the control over actions
in Syria will be taken over
by a Russian-Iranian "partnership" which
would exclude the European Union
and Turkey and that U.S. involvement
could be too late and
inefficient.

Turkey fears this development after a diplomatic crisis
erupted with
Syria when more than 40 Turkish intelligence officers were
captured by
the Syrian army. Over the past week, Turkey has been conducting
intensive negotiations with Syria in order to secure their freedom, and
Syria insists that their release will be conditioned on the extradition
of Syrian officers and soldiers that defected and are currently in
Turkey.

Syria also conditioned the continuation of the negotiations on
Turkey's
blockade of weapon transfers and passage of soldiers from the
rebels'
Free Syria Army through its territory. It also demanded that Iran
sponsor the negotiations of releasing the Turkish officers.

Turkey,
who mediated several weeks ago between the Free Syria Army and
Iran to
secure the release of several Iranian citizens who were captured
by the
rebels, rejects Syria's demands, and for this reason Turkish
sources believe
that Turkey will soon decide on hardening its stance on
Syria.

Syria,
on the other hand, has recently published "confessions" that it
allegedly
gathered from the Turkish officers that they were trained by
Israel's
Mossad, and were given instructions to carry out bombings to
undermine the
country's security. According to the Syrians, one of the
Turkish officers
said that the Mossad also trains soldiers from the Free
Syria Army, and that
Mossad agents came to Jordan in order to train
al-Qaida officials to send to
Syria to carry out attacks.

(4) Turkey says 13 French officers 'captured
by Syrian Army'; France denies that French soldiers were on Syrian
soil

Thirteen French officers have
been captured by Syrian forces according
to the Lebanon-based Daily Star
newspaper, the first mainstream media
outlet to report on rumours of Western
troops on the ground.

Free Syrian Army fighters gather near a building
hit by a Syrian Army
tank in Idlib, northern Syria Photo: AP Photo/Rodrigo
Abd

By Henry Samuel, Paris, and Amy Willis

8:07AM GMT 05 Mar
2012

The French foreign ministry dismissed the report, however, telling
the
Daily Telegraph that not a single French soldier is on Syrian
soil.

But the defence ministry was less categorical, saying it neither
confirmed nor denied the claim.

A photographer who recently escaped
from the besieged Syrian city of
Homs also dismissed suggestions French
soldiers had intervened to secure
his evacuation and that of three other
Western reporters.

The report came on Monday as the Red Cross and the
Syrian Arab Red
Crescent reached two neighbourhoods of Homs where they were
distributing
food and blankets to civilians, including families who had fled
the
battered district of Baba Amr.

The teams still do not appear to
have been allowed into Baba Amr itself. ...

The report claiming that
French officers are on the ground came from the
Daily Star, a reputable
newspaper in Beirut.

The Daily Star cites a Damascus-based Pro-Syrian
Palestinian source as
alleging that the French troops are being held in a
field hospital in Homs.

The source claimed officials in Paris and
Damascus are brokering a deal
on what to do with the French
nationals.

No explanation as to why the French troops had been in Syria
was given
nor was any indication as to whether they had been part of a
larger
contingent.

It was not possible to independently verify the
claims.

A foreign ministry spokesman in France said: “We deny the idea
that
there are French troops on the ground”. A defence spokesman said: “We
have no information on this. We neither confirm nor deny
it".

Damascus has not commented on the presence of French troops on
Syrian soil.

However, Nato Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said
last month it
had no intention of intervening in the country as with
Libya.

"No, I don’t think so because Syria is also a different society,
it is
much more complicated ethnically, politically, religiously. That’s why
I
do believe that a regional solution should be found,” he said. ...

About Me

'Mission statement'.
I am convinced that jewish individuals and groups have an enormous influence on the world. The MSM are, for almost all people, the only source of information, and these are largely controlled by jewish people.
So there is a huge under-reporting on jewish influence in the world.
I see it as my mission to try to close this gap. To quote Henry Ford: "Corral the 50 wealthiest jews and there will be no wars." `(Thomas Friedman wrote the same in Haaretz, about the war against Iraq! See yellow marked area, blog 573)
If that is true, my mission must be very beneficial to humanity.